"A Committee of Correspondence"

23 April 2017

"THE URGENT NEED FOR BORIS JOHNSON TO CLARIFY ... " by Habakkuk

HABAKKUK ON THE URGENT NEED FOR BORIS JOHNSON TO CLARIFY WHAT HE IS CLAIMING ABOUT TESTS ON SAMPLES FROM KHAN SHEIKHUN. ARE THEY SUPPOSE TO MATCH THE SARIN USED AT GHOUTA, OR THAT DESTROYED ON THE M.V. ‘CAPE RAY’?

A letter to the Chairs of the Commons Defence and Foreign Affairs Committees, the Rt Hon Julian Lewis MP, and Crispin Blunt MP, and their colleagues, sent on 23 April.

Dear Dr Lewis, Mr Blunt and fellow members of the Defence and Foreign Affairs Committees:

In his 5 April article in the ‘Guardian’ Martin Chulov reported that: ‘Rescue workers have gathered soil samples from the scene of a chemical weapons attack in northern Syria and sent them to western intelligence officials’. And he went on to explain that:

Samples taken from the scene in Khan Sheikhun, as well as biological specimens taken from survivors and casualties, will be compared with samples taken by intelligence officials from the Syrian military stockpile when it was withdrawn from the country in late 2013. Syria’s stores of sarin are known to have particular properties, which experts say can be forensically matched to samples taken in the field.

What the Foreign Secretary told the House on Tuesday was that ‘we know from shell fragments in the crater that sarin had not only been used, but that it was sarin carrying the specific chemical signature of sarin used by the Assad regime.’ Responding to the Khan Sheikhoun incident on 4 April, Mr Johnson asserted that ‘this bears all the hallmarks of an attack by the regime which has repeatedly used chemical weapons.’

So, what is the Foreign Secretary now suggesting? Is it that tests have shown that the ‘particular properties’ of the sarin found in the samples purporting to come from Khan Sheikhun have been shown to match those of the materials whose destruction on the U.S. vessel MV ‘Cape Ray’ was completed in August 2014? Or is it that they have been shown to match those identified by tests on samples from the incidents which have been adduced in support of the claim that the Syrian government ‘has repeatedly used chemical weapons’?

As I pointed out last week, precisely the contention of those who have argued that the 21 August 2013 atrocity at Ghouta was a ‘false flag’ is that the test results on samples from that incident, and its predecessors, demonstrate that the sarin used there did not have the ‘particular properties’ of that in the Syrian government arsenal.

The ‘chemical signature’ of the sarin used at Ghouta, those who have argued that the incident was a ‘false flag’ assert, was totally different from that of the high-quality toxin produced for the Syrian programme, intended to provide a ‘poor man’s deterrent’ against Israel.

Before we can get involved in substantive arguments about the Foreign Secretary’s assertions, we really do need to clarify precisely what it is he and his officials are claiming. The only attempt I have seen at such clarification was made by Charles Shoebridge, a former army officer and Scotland Yard detective, on ‘Twitter’.

The thread shows Shoebridge attempting to secure clarification, and in so doing putting the crucial question – which ‘chemical markers’ were at issue. At 8.46 am on 19 April he ‘tweeted’: ‘Thanks for reply: To be clear, CW from 4.4.17 an exact match of @OPCW samples of old Syria govt sarin stocks?’ At 12.48pm, Norman responded: ‘You’re welcome! Think it is a question of same markers, but will check.’

So, when the Foreign Secretary was making confident assertions to the House, a British diplomat in Washington specialising in Syria did not really have a clear idea what he was claiming. It is now 22 April, and Norman has provided no clarification. We still do now know precisely what HMG are suggesting the test results at Porton Down prove, and it is not clear whether the Foreign Secretary does either.

The article Mr Johnson wrote in the ‘Telegraph’ was headlined ‘Assad’s murderous behaviour offers an opportunity for Russia to end a tyranny.’ In his remarks to the House, he said that it ‘will be essential to have a political process that preserves the institutions of the Syrian state while decapitating the monster.’

The case that the Russian government has made is that critical evidence purporting to prove that Assad is a ‘monster’ is the product of ‘false flag’ operations. That our signal failure to ‘preserve the institutions’ of the Iraqi and Libyan states, while ‘decapitating’ them, gives reason for scepticism about our ability to do any better in Syria is also central to the case the Russians have made about how the situation there is best handled.

It remains uncertain how far the Russian government will go to defend what it perceives to be its interests in Syria, but the risks of war involving nuclear powers if the United States and Britain want – yet again – to pursue ‘régime change’ would seem to be not entirely negligible.

In this situation, for the Foreign Secretary to make a statement to the House, in which – as has happened time and again – cloudy claims about tests on samples from Syria have been produced, without any concrete evidence, and where it is not even clear what he is claiming, is remarkable. It is almost as remarkable that one of our diplomats handling these matters in Washington appears equally at sea.

If one adds in the fact that the only visible attempt to clarify an obvious basic question is performed a former policeman on ‘Twitter’, we would seem to be confronted by a major breakdown of parliamentary government.

The letter I sent you last week has been posted on Colonel Lang’s ‘Sic Semper Tyrannis’ blog. So also will this one be.

Let's say the chemical signature of the sarin used in the latest attack matches perfectly with that from the Assad stockpile. What then ? Assad is guilty ?

No. Absolutely no. Either or both of AQ and ISIS may have - probably have - stashes from the Assad stockpile squirreled away in tunnels somewhere.

Similarly , what if the signature suggests "kitchen" sarin ? Does that mean the rebels are caught red-handed ? No , again. If Assad really wanted to conduct a sarin gas attack , the dumbest thing he could do would be to use material he saved from his supposedly destroyed stockpile. Instead , he should have his chemists cook up some kitchen grade sarin , seeking to implicate the rebels. Not to mention that when his troops overrun a rebel position , there's always a possibility they'll run across a stash of rebel-made or procured sarin and/or precursors , in which case Assad's chemists wouldn't be needed.

This is like arguing about whether Hitler's gassing was worse than Assad's gassing. Once you engage in that trivial debate , you've already conceded in the absolutely vital debate. That's what's about to happen here.

* Unlike the genius Spicer claimed recently in a notable and public attack of severe dementia (quite embarassingly, and actually suggesting firing him) - Hitler DID use gas on Germans - think of using Zyklon B in the holocaust and so forth. For that vile crime the bastard probably still boils in hell.

* The second part is the suggestion that Assad did use gas on his own people in Ghouta and Khan Sheikhun, and some other place.

There, so far, are only suggestions and claims that that is so. It is suggestive that the accusation makes rebels, despite defeats and comitted crimes, look good.

Lets just ignore the use of gas in car bombs by ISIS in Iraq, and the mysterious (probably magical) immunity of unprotected helpers against usually quite deadly gas like Sarin.

These two things speak a clear and disturbing language about this. There would be benefit for rebels of all colours to fake such situations for PR. That is in fact so clear that just believing what they say as truth is an utter folly.

It is quite telling that so long there are no proofs - just claims and accusations. IMO, it won't get much better.

Such an embarasing situation still was good enough to serve as an excuse to attack Iraq. It certainly was quite recently good enough an excuse to cruise missile Assad.

It appears that proof or evidence are quietly quite unwanted if they, say, may get in the way of a clearly wanted policy that has been decided alreay: Policy like: * Regime Change! * Assad must go! (for gassing his people!) * No Shia ruled and/or supporting terrain from Iran to Lebanon! * etc. pp.)

Marko
You are forgetting context and how this issue is framed in the mainstream media. They state that people were killed by sarin gas, dropped from Syrian jets, period. This is the pretext for 59 tomahawk missiles and a 50% drop in SAA sorties against over the past month.

The MSM are arguing that as there were people poisoned by gas (with similar chemical markers [weasel words]) to Syria's sarin, Assad did it, period,there can be no question.

Asking what that gas actually was in light of symptoms shown by victims, how it could have been made (impossible as al qaeda won't allow inspectors on the ground to obtain real samples), how it was delivered (argued quite convincingly not by jet ), why it would be delivered, these detract from the fact that Assad is the same as Hitler?

I do not think you make a persuasive case.

What's important is establishing that A. the attack was not sarin gas, undermining the entire thrust of the false flag
B. The Syrian government had no reason to use chlorine or some organophosphate poison in this random small area
C. That the local al qaeda had the means, motive, and opportunity to effect a gas attack on the civilians of this town

The propaganda relies on short American memories (except for events 79 years ago). Popular radio talk show host Michael Savage (ranked #1 in streaming audience), who was a huge Trump supporter and no doubt was responsible for Trump's victory, has been disgusted with Trump's attack on Syria and caving to the neocons. He is one of the strongest voices out there against the necons and the regime change in Syria. The beginning of his show on 4/13 was awesome and he compared the characterization of Assad with that of America's greatest hero during our Civil War. Col. Lang will especially appreciate it. It's the first minute of his show: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=53HyoNwuMg4&feature=youtu.be

What's important is establishing that A. the attack was not sarin gas, undermining the entire thrust of the false flag.... "

Maybe you'll be more persuaded when you see how this plays out. I predict your Wish A goes right down the crapper. They will conclusively find sarin with a fingerprint much more closely matching Assad's stockpile than that of the kitchen sarin used in the previous two attacks. I think this will happen BECAUSE I think it's a false-flag , a false-flag long-planned - not by rebels , but by outside actors . Using sarin from Assad's stock was done explicitly to frame Assad and , based on the way everyone who rightfully expects this was a false-flag also stupidly thinks there's no way it was sarin , or if it was sarin it couldn't possibly have come from Assad's stockpile , I'm convinced both Assad and almost all of his blogosphere defenders will follow precisely the path of your Wish A.

The last thing the pro-truth crowd should care about is sarin fingerprints and they should make that clear in advance , because if they don't , they're going to look like they're desperately reaching for other excuses once those final results unexpectedly come out the wrong way.

The issues surrounding Khan Sheikhun - the nature of the incident, the identification of the perpetrators, and the appropriate response (whether international in nature or not) can no longer be separated from the political postures of the Fortress West versus Shia Islam, Judaism, and the Russian Federation.

Here below is a link from an Australian colonel, a veteran of Iraq War of 2003, who is very clearly an enemy of the Shia and a friend of Israel.

This is a Fortress West alliance-wide posture, in my opinion. And furthermore, I think that even a proper and dispassionate inquest into the incident in Khan Sheikhun will do nothing to dissolve this enmity toward Shia Islam or Iran.

On the disposition of Palestine, on the disposition of Iraq, and on the security of the Persian Gulf Iran, the Shia State, and her allies are in complete disagreement with Fortress West and the Gulfies.

On the disposition of the Levant and in Afghanistan, Iran and the Russian Federation are one side and the Fortress West (and Pakistan) are on the other.

Neither of these postures are amenable to any amicable resolution, specially after the Iranian offer of settlement based on spheres of influence was rejected.

I think that all sides are quite comfortable with a war of attrition; which likely will not end in our lifetimes.

“An autopsy was conducted in Adana on three bodies taken from Idlib. A representative for the World Heath Organization, representatives from the OPCW and forensic experts participated in the autopsy. As a result of the autopsy, it has been determined that a chemical weapon was used. The forensic report has clearly revealed this."

Subsequent statements clarified that OPCW representatives were present at the autopsy but did not "participate".

The Turkish Health Ministry stated on 6 April that “Pulmonary edema, a rise in the weight of and bleeding in the lungs were detected in the initial findings of the autopsy,” and "Based on the test results, evidence was detected in patients which leads one to think they were exposed to a chemical substance (sarin),”

Can any Turkish readers help to find the original text of this statement about the autopsy findings, and to provide a translation?

Pulmonary edema is filling of the air cavities of the lung with fluid, causing the victim to drown. The build-up of fluid in the lungs can be quantified by weighing them, as described in the Turkish statement. The autopsy findings of pulmonary edema and bleeding indicate that these individuals died of acute inhalation injury. Exposure to a gas like chlorine or phosgene in a confined space would do this. Sarin, even
impure sarin, couldn't possibly do this because it would kill by causing respiratory paralysis before the victim inhaled enough to cause lung injury. The Turkish health ministry, and the NYT journalists who reported this are too clueless to realize that the autopsy findings debunk the sarin story.

From the OPCW statement on 19 April, it's clear that biomedical samples from these
three autopsies, together with seven survivors, tested positive for
sarin.

''The bio-medical samples collected from three victims during their
autopsy were analysed at two OPCW designated laboratories. The results
of the analysis indicate that the victims were exposed to Sarin or a
Sarin-like substance. Bio-medical samples from seven individuals
undergoing treatment at hospitals were also analysed in two other OPCW
designated laboratories. Similarly, the results of these analyses
indicate exposure to Sarin or a Sarin-like substance.

Director-General Üzümcü stated clearly: “The results of these analyses
from four OPCW designated laboratories indicate exposure to Sarin or a
Sarin-like substance. While further details of the laboratory analyses
will follow, the analytical results already obtained are
incontrovertible.”''

I don't think you can get sarin into people after they're dead. So these three individuals died of acute inhalation injury, but their blood samples showed exposure to sarin or a sarin-like substance, whatever that means.

Possible explanations

(1) the biomedical samples taken during the autopsy under OPCW supervision were substituted by samples from other people, or were spiked with sarin.

(2) these individuals (before death), and the other seven survivors were exposed to low
levels of sarin or a sarin-like substance, enough to make them test positive but not enough to cause severe symptoms. Tests for adducts of sarin with BChE or albumin are very sensitive, and can detect low levels of exposure.

If we had quantitative lab results from which to estimate the dosage of sarin, it might be possible to distinguish between these two explanations.

I apologize if this has been posted previously (I just got back from an extended vacation without Internet and have not been able to keep up with the comments), but this is a good analysis of the victims by someone trained in neuropharmacology: http://logophere.com/Topics2017/17-04/17_017-BLA-Sarin.htm.

Whatever killed those people, it was not Sarin. As for any soil samples, provenance of the samples, and the chain of custody, are completely unknown. Thus, they are forensically useless.

Since the black-ops folks from Britain are in this up to their eyeballs, funding the White Helmets with somewhere vaguely around $50M, I believe it is wishful thinking to say that Britain will come up with anything other than "Assad Did It" in their tests. Still worth a shot though.

"Hitler DID use gas on Germans - think of using Zyklon B in the holocaust and so forth. For that vile crime the bastard probably still boils in hell."

There's as much solid evidence that "Hitler DID use gas on Germans [sic]" as that Assad used Sarin on Syrians.

Max Planck Institute chemist Germar Rudolf analyzed the case of the former even more exhaustively than Habakkuk analyzed the case for the latter. Rudolf demonstrated that Xyklon-B was evident in facilities used to de-louse clothing, etc. to prevent typhus, but not in facilities alleged to have been used in a "planned, systematic, industrialized scheme to exterminate every Jew Hitler could get his hands on," which is the dogmatic position enforced by holocaust scholars such as David Engel, prof. at New York Univ. and scholar at US taxpayer-subsidized holocaust museum in DC. Sean Spicer was forced to apologize for the Galileo crime of voicing an observed reality that contradicted that state-enforced dogma (a situation that violates several of the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment guarantees).

For his efforts, Rudolf was fined, imprisoned for ~4 years, denied his doctoral credentials, deprived of the ability to build a career on his education and training, his German residence repeatedly searched and his papers confiscated, his family life disrupted to the point of divorce and estrangement from his children. Effectively exiled from his fatherland, Germany, Rudolf sought shelter in USA, which, instead, employed trickery to return him to Germany where he was again jailed. Having served several years, Rudolf now resides in tenuous circumstances in USA. The lawyer who defended Rudolf in German courts was herself jailed.

Marko
We're in agreement that it's another, better executed false flag.
However, the general argument reputing a sarin attack is the lack of signs of sarin exposure in the bodies of the victims as well as the lack of affected 'white helmets.' Who handled these bodies.
Anybody can claim anything they like, but without actually being there, confidence in claims of tested samples and so on is vapor. If it's truly a war crime and humanitarian catastrophe, why not allow neutral parties access to the site.
If the perpetrators had access to Syrian Gov recipe sarin, then they should welcome inspectors with open arms to find obvious traces of it everywhere.
No?

Off Topic. What the "West" is witnessing is the greatest triumph in the history of modern propaganda. The cherry on the sundae is Emmanuel Macron. Look at the front page of the LeMonde website: ecstatic, white, upper middle class kids (a token black kid in the background) hysterically cheering Macron's victory. Tony Blair must be green with envy.

Everyone in France is registered for national service, but they have an all volunteer army, an army that really doesn't do any of the NATO heavy lifting. What is more, France, whatever it may think of Russia's "Hitlerian invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea", clearly has absolutely no fear at all of war. "Terrorism"? Just North Africans acting up.

I had never heard of Michael Savage, and he does seem pretty nuts, but if he has gone bonkers over Trump's onanism in Syria more power to him. Nevertheless the big guns are ruling the public mind.

And I reiterate that the Korean War was finally between China and the U.S. And I reiterate that if I were Russia or China I would do my damnedest to get as many American troops fighting hot wars in as many foreign countries as possible. It is not sustainable. Propaganda is ultimately lies.

With that succinct response Imagine you have hit the nail firmly on the head my friend.

With all due respect there are far too many people in these parts awarding far too much trust & credibility to our lying Western Govts.

The plan for Syria has been out of the bag now for over half a decade; regime change, Assad must go (no concession or debate on that) Balkanize the country, cut the Shia Crescent & neuter Hezbollah in the process, pave the way for the Qatari pipeline & create the conditions to target Iran then expose the flank if Southern Russia.

Yes,Ante,what I want to see is a full-blown,independent investigation.New blood and tissue and environmental samples if at all possible,but with proper handling and chain of custody this time. Find out where people were when they were affected,who they are, where they live,count the dead properly,exhume as many as you can for I.D. and samples.Where's all that clothing they stuffed into plastic bags at the hospital? Test it.Credibly.

The works is what I want,but something tells me that's not what I'm going to get.

This whole fingerprint discussion bugs me in the same way that the barrel-bomb discussion does. In both cases , it's a distraction. The proper pro-Assad argument is not to say he doesn't use barrel-bombs , because he does,he's admitted as much,and they're a perfectly reasonable and common DIY method as used by many armed forces from less-wealthy countries. The proper argument is to say it's a stupid argument,a waste of breath.

Now if he's being unfairly accused of loading them up with gasses and white phosphorus , then that must be defended.But 500 lbs of explosives is going to blow a lot of crap up whether it's in an ugly Syrian square-ended DIY abortion of a bomb or in a NATO sleek and shiny,pointy-ended one.

Those who shout "barrel-bomb" every 10 minutes are making fools of themselves.Someone should let them know.

The election in France on 23 April pushes the issue of Syria and intervention by outsiders up to the front. There will be a runoff election between Marine Le Pen and Emmanuel Macron. Previously a member of the Socialist Party, Mr. Macron magically became an "independent" not very long ago and and declared himself a "centrist", with a new slogan, "En Marche!", which some articles have translated as meaning "Forward!". Mr. Macron wants a military intervention into Syria if the Assad government was found to have carried out an alleged chemical attack--

I do not know if France uses electronic voting machines, but regardless of whether it does nor not, if Macron wins the runoff, the war and regime change pushers about Syria will have another mouthpiece.

Meanwhile, in scenic New Zealand, a conference gets underway this week of the "Five Eyes" surveillance nations -- the U.S., Canada, Britain, Australia, and New Zealand -- at the fancy Millbrook resort in Arrowtown--

These "public servants" who are supposed to be accountable to "the people" have, of course, not even revealed their agenda, while flying in on government or leased private jets. No United Airlines flights for them!

While FBI director James Comey is relaxing in New Zealand, Kim Dotcom, formerly Kim Schmitz, an early creator of centralized computer storage and file sharing kind of like "The Cloud", is stuck in his house there still litigating the attempt by the U.S. government to extradite him to the U.S. after charging him with crimes relating to "copyright infringement", bootstrapping those allegations into "racketeering" and "money laundering", etc.--

On the home front, the New York Times has a long article about politics in the U.S. and FBI Dir. Comey, and far down in the article, mentions that the former British MI6 agent Christopher Steele, who put together the titillating "dossier" about Donald Trump and Russia, was to be paid $50,000 by the FBI if the material in the report could be properly corroborated, but apparently the corroboration never was found, and so the FBI did not pay Steele the money--

Shargash, Thank you for this. The evidence presented by O'Brien is staggering when one considers the number of governments and news organizations that did not mention to the public the most striking symptoms of sarin poisoning.

As word circulates about the true symptoms, these actors are not going to recover from the gruesome hoax they helped terrorists perpetrate. There are simply too many videos/photos available to the public of the purported sarin victims, which clearly show their symptoms could not have been from sarin.